To all: Most recent post at the bottom. From the WSJ, is this a bunch of shorts posting? otherwise watch out for declining enrollments!
#54 of 77: Chris Horne Thu 19 Feb '98 (09:06 AM)
Good bye AOL!
I have been an AOL subscriber for years. I dont use the proprietary
content and have it mainly for logging on to the internet when I am
traveleing. Well, it seems like MCI has log ons for over 300 cities at
$14.95 per month, providing you are a MCI customer ($19.95 otherwise).
So see ya later Steve!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#55 of 77: Erin McGrath Fri 20 Feb '98 (07:19 AM)
I also strongly agree that AOL is a great starting point for those
users who have little or no experience with the Internet. I feel that
if you have found your way here you do not fit into that category!!
I, at a certain point, found myself to be limited by AOL. As you
become more familiar with the Internet and its advantages, you learn
what an ISP is and that AOL is not that!! As I read in one of the
previous messages I discovered yet another annoying bit of information
about AOL...THEY PUT A 45 MINUTE CAP ON WEB ACCESS?!?!?!?!?! What is
up with that!?!?
When I first was experimenting with ISP's, I tried CompuServe. It was
a little too vanilla compared to AOL (the only thing that I knew that
the time), however I can now appreciate it. My wish for that division,
now or soon to be operated by AOL, is that they don't bastardize it!!
Where is Prodigy???
#56 of 77: Dave Pool Fri 20 Feb '98 (07:20 AM)
AOL offers a good product that allows people that do not have good PC
skills to take advantage of networking and have an internet email
address. For those people I think this is still a good option even
with the price increase.
Personally I am not a fan of AOL. The frequent busy signals, slower
modem speeds, the auto-timeout, the spam mail, unwanted advertising,
etc. simply grate my nerves. Then a price increase on top of all that
is just plain bad business. It is possible that Steve Case simply
wants to cut back on some of his customer base and keep the more loyal
ones. That will resolve some of his technical issues such as busy
signals. I have two ISP accounts, one with Bell Atlantic and the other
with AOL that is used primarily by my wife. This price increase will
push me to cancel the AOL account and teach her how to use a regular
ISP account. (Of course, only if she agrees).
#57 of 77: Fred Hoekstra Fri 20 Feb '98 (07:20 AM)
Too Much for Too Little:
I have been an AOL user for several years, and for the most part have
been getting my $'s worth. However, even prior to the latest
announcement, I've have been thinking about switching services. My
techy friends have all abandoned AOL for other providers and have told
me that they are extremely satisfied with the ease of use and value.
Well now that prices are going up at AOL I have made up my mind--I'm
leaving. I'm certain that I will enjoy a noteworthy saving without
incurring a significant change in service.
Here's an idea for AOL: charge us $2 per year to forward our e-mail to
our new server, I'll bet you that fee income from this service will
soon dwarf your regular revenues!!!
#58 of 77: Barry Hand Fri 20 Feb '98 (07:21 AM)
I'm looking into quitting AOL..most functions of interest to me can be
done through a combination of functions like Netscape and Yahoo for
free..and faster because there is no firewall between AOL and the
outside world..if I'm doing this so are others...AOL will eventually
operate in a niche as their usrers learn the web..when WebTV comes on
they will be under great pressure as they will be caught in the
pinch..but for the moment and transition period..enjoy the ride ;-)
#59 of 77: Gary Ashford Mon 23 Feb '98 (07:42 AM)
Pricing aside, my AOL experience has been a bit of a nightmare. I
surveyed various services for inexperienced Web users last year (after
the major network troubles were over) and decided, with the multiple
user capability (screen names) and price that AOL was the best route to
go for our church. The busy signals were the first complaints I
received. Then, it was the general slowness of the service (I told my
users that they must always bring some reading material along when they
are on the service). Then, through my ISP account, I used to send
"bulk" mailings (about 70), 20% of which were to AOL users. At that
time, they were experimenting with blocking spamming ISP's. Blocking
was the default setting, so most users didn't even know what had
happened, so detailed instructions had to be sent to "UNBLOCK"
everything, at the risk of getting junk mail. Because my ISP had a
name similar, but not the same as one they were blocking, suddenly, all
my mail stopped going through. Repeated calls and e-mails to various
locations within AOL yielded a very upsetting stone-wall. Obviously,
they must have been innundated with complaints, but no response, no
words, no nothing came from AOL, even to users. Recently, they
introduced a new scheme which allows one to block specific e-mail
addresses.
This certainly didn't help, especially from the pornographic spammers
using HOTMAIL or CHEERFUL using random name generation or counterfeit
reply addresses. This is my other tale of misery. Somehow my screen
name on my personal support account had been gleaned by these clowns
and, as a result, were dumping "LOOK AT THIS SITE" e-mails at least
once per day, until I deleted that screen name
Just recently, I saw an article where both AOL and HOTMAIL had joined
forces to go after this element.
My last story has to do with going out into the CHAT area trying to
find some information about the new AOL 4.0. I was innundated with
Instant Messages asking me to look at various pornographic sites.
I do not have a clue how my screen name became associated with this
sort of trash, but I have never had such an experience with regular web
service. I started to panic thinking perhaps our pastors were getting
such material as well.
I will migrate as quickly as I can away from this poorly run and poor
content service to correct my mistaken choice.
Clean interface AOL is not.
#60 of 77: DickCarter Mon 23 Feb '98 (07:43 AM)
I agree with the bulk of respondents: the user friendly AOL format was
great to start out but the spamming and busy signals and automatic
cancelling- or messages that shut down typing in the midst of E mail-
cancels the advantages. After several complaints which weren't
answered, to increase rates is to add 100 octane to the fire. We're
switching to a real ISP.
#61 of 77: Mike Bennett Mon 23 Feb '98 (07:43 AM)
AOL is about content. Their sources of revenue - subscriptions and
advertising. Their core competency - creating an on-line community
that is relatively secure and professionally managed. Once the
security issues are somewhat resolved, I would guess that they will get
out of the ISP business and focus on content and community management.
The ISP business is a commodity. There is no long-term value in that
business. I personally wrote them off about one year ago. I thought
that the SIGNIFICANT promotion campaign would suck their cash flow dry.
However, it appears that the masses have responded to their
promotions quite well. In addition, they have created a momentum of
sponsors - starting with Amazon.com.
I'm just not sure if they will flip over to an Internet site or not.
My guess is that they could conceivably control Internet consumer
commerce with their huge subsciber list. When that happens, maybe they
should change their name to WOL (World Online).
#62 of 77: Tony J. Gagnon Tue 24 Feb '98 (07:34 AM)
AOL's move to increase rates by 10% is consistent with their lack of
concern for their members. When AOL first introduced the unlimited
access for $19.95 it knew it's members would be faced with increased
busy signals, but it did not care. I believe this rate increase will
start to push some of the members out the door. I still have a tough
time believing that people are still tolerating the busy signals. This
rate increase will hopefully be the beginning of the end for AOL.
AOL is for beginner Internet users and the more people get accustomed
to Internet access the less likely they are to stay with AOL. Access
to the Internet is expanding rapidly through cable companies. When
accessing through cable companies there is no modem, no tying up the
telephone and a much faster connection. When AOL starts to feel the
effects of this they will start to bail out.
#63 of 77: Leland W. Miklovic Tue 24 Feb '98 (07:34 AM)
Quite simply, AOL has capitalized on the novice with regard to the
internet and its applications. These new users, as we can all attest,
typically are not yet highly knowledgeable about the web and its
applications. AOL provides a very good medium for those who need to
easily navigate the web. Additionally, AOL provides an 800 dial-in
service, which capitalizes on the rural customer who would not
typically use other internet service providers (relying on only major
city connectivity) due to the associated long-distance charges.
Strategically, I look for AOL to continue these efforts and to
strengthen its network capabilities through acquisitions and internal
growth. AOL will grow its new user base and target existing internet
users who have the option to switch from their current ISP. Wall
Street is placing a high valuation on AOL for these very same reasons.
Look for AOL to parter with one or more communications companies,
particularly wireless and traditional cable, and consequently lead the
charge of internet applications on the television.
#64 of 77: Sam Tatum Wed 25 Feb '98 (07:34 AM)
I like some of AOL's content. However access in the evening is now no
better if not worse than it was last year this time after they offered
unlimited service. Also their actual data transmission rates are
significantly slower than my modem rates; I presume this is from
overloaded servers. The only reason I have not moved on is that COX
Cable is offering 1 megabit service in our area for a reasonable rate,
but has not yet gotten the service to my zip code. I hate to move to
another ISP and hence e-mail address any more often than necessary, and
therefore am waiting for COX. However if COX doesn't move quickly, I
will make a move anyway. Unfortunately, I think AOL has let its
subscribers down, and doesn't seem to care.
#65 of 77: Charles Parkhurst Thu 26 Feb '98 (07:34 AM)
The trend toward fee-based sites is a negative for AOL. As people
start paying for content, they will quickly realize that the $22/month
that they pay AOL is wasted. Standard ISP access at a much cheaper
rate will slow AOL's growth. Also, the price increase will cause
light users to drop and the marginal cost to AOL will rise
dramatically.
AOL is hugely overvalued.
#66 of 77: AMIT BARSHIKAR Mon 02 Mar '98 (08:12 AM)
I THINK RAISING THE MONTHLY FEES BY AOL SHOULD MAKE A MINOR DIFFERENCE
IN THEIR REVENUES. ONCE YOU ARE USED TO THE EASY BROWSING AND THE
SPEED IT ALLOS IT IS HARD TO QUIT. IT HAS TO SOME EXTENT INELASTIC
DEMAND.
#67 of 77: Teri Hartley Tue 03 Mar '98 (08:24 AM)
I am a novice computer user and for that reason I stuck with AOL for
about a year. The computer users are much more loyal to AOL than
management is to them. With the help of my son, who is an electrical
engineer, he wised me up and weened me off AOL. I am now with
superlink.net and I am much happier. Make the break. Its well worth
it. Before you do, however, get someone in the know to help you make
the transition or find a server with help installing, etc. Good luck.
#68 of 77: JOHN M. COFFEY, M.D. Wed 04 Mar '98 (08:27 AM)
I maintained my $9.95 rate when the original unlimited access was
offered, and have found that the convenience of AOL is worth this
price, with occasional overuse. I do however use Worldnet for extended
use. In brief, it's hard to match AOL's many features.
#69 of 77: Jim Mellody Thu 05 Mar '98 (07:50 AM)
I'm thinking of switching to Bell Atlantic for unlimited internet
access for $17.95. Bell Atlaniic just reduced their price by $2 per
month to the $17.95 charge. AOL is losing Dow Jones as their new
source and is switching to Bloomsburg. AOL will be fighting a losing
battle for members as companies like the Wall Street Journal and Dow
Jones etc. are easily found on the internet. Distributed information
versus centralized services will win out. No bottlenecks. Something is
wrong at AOL. The price should be coming down...although Steve Case
does make a good case to justify the increase because guys like me are
on the internet much longer now. By the way, Case just sold 500,000
shares in AOL which netted him $60 million. We may be seeing him
insuring his financial security by investing in Treasury bonds versus
keeping his AOL stock. He has been a great leader and this may be the
peak.
#70 of 77: TRadigan Sat 07 Mar '98 (08:18 AM)
Although my children use AOL, I have very little use for it except,
occasionally, in a pinch. Now that AOL owns my main ISP, I will
probably make a clean break of it, and find another, more reliable ISP.
Children must, after all, grow up sometime.
#71 of 77: Stanley E Holliday Wed 11 Mar '98 (07:48 AM)
AOL said I was a Charter User. I think that means I have been with
them for a long time. I have three AOL accounts. I like AOL. Every
place I go I can use AOL. I have a work connected ISP and I find it
wise to keep AOL. I am a Compuserve user also. I agree with the
comment earlier, about being glad that they have left it alone.
One of my problems is the ADS. If 21.95 would end the ads I would be
happy. Some times the ads end my AOL sessions. I have changed my
PREF. and they still comeup.
I am confused with one of AOL' reasons for the increase. This is to
pay for Connection upgrade. It was my impression that in our economic
system the owner invests his/her money. If AOL is going to give me
equity, then OK!
#72 of 77: Mike Davis Tue 17 Mar '98 (08:20 AM)
I love AOL.
I travel all over the country and I can connect with a local number
any where, any time. I've tried AT&T's service and Bellsouth.net. I
came back to AOL for the ability to connect to locations around the
country.
Many of my friends say that the other ISP's are better but I don't see
a difference on the internet and no one has the content like AOL.
But my favorite feature is that all of my kids can get on line for no
extra charge.
#73 of 77: JamesVander Velde Fri 20 Mar '98 (08:16 AM)
Hey SteveCase!! If you are reading this, "Where is the refund you
PROMISED me for all the delays and down time in late 1996 and early
1997?" In the mean time your price increase will not bother me one
bit. You see we don't have a business relationship any longer. I just
got sick and tired of waiting for AOL to connect me to the sites I want
to visit on the net. O, , by the way MY ISP provides spell check for
my email, not just promises.
#74 of 77: railton cabbell Mon 30 Mar '98 (08:25 AM)
It's not the price rise that I mind. It's the lousy service! I'm
sick and tired of getting kicked off the web every time I move to
another site. The ads are bothersome. The nuisance errors that I have
to deal with are a huge waste of time. The commercial clutter is akin
to pollution. Yes, it's ubiquitous and that's nice. But someone told
me recently that AOL's system was created as a tool for one mid sized
company and is not fit to serve 10 million people or even half that.
I'm wondering if this isn't true. The technical problems here are
legion and I don't see them moving to correct anything.
#75 of 77: Lawrence Dawson Tue 31 Mar '98 (08:30 AM)
I have come to regard AOL a merely a source for free diskettes. I
don't use their services, not even CIS any more. And they are grossly
overpriced for what they do provide, in addition to having a censorious
attitude to any "controversial" topics. Who needs them!
#76 of 77: John B Buckley Tue 31 Mar '98 (08:31 AM)
Mr. Case,
Perhaps MSN (Microsoft Network) can teach you'll about blocking
pornography and other unsolicited commercial e-mail. Haven't had a bit
since I switched, and MSN system performance is much better too.
Long downloads (an hour+) are never disturbed, arriving intact.
#77 of 77: Dan Gilman Tue 31 Mar '98 (08:31 AM)
I have been using AOL for 5 years which probably makes me one of their
first users. I used to LOVE the service but now I hate it. You only
need to read the other messages below to find out why.
I actually tried to cancel my subscription yesterday but apparently
you can't do this on-line????? and after waiting 20 minutes to talk to
someone at the company I was forwarded around in circles until I just
gave up after 40 minutes. What kind of company is it that you can't
even cancel your subscription? (If anyone from AOL is reading this....
please cancel London Account "LBDanInLn"!!!)
The sad thing is that AOL used to have an inventive product with
pretty good service. Now it's just a headache to deal with. I'm sorry
that all the bad management at the company ruined what used to be a
really good product. But I guess their getting what they deserve.
Pancho |
